Evaluation of Hot=BrineStimulation

Technique for Gas Production

From Natural Gas Hydrates
Wdyadhar A. Kamsrth, SPE, U. of Alaska
Sanjay R Godbol@ SPE, U. of Alaska

SPE 1355$
Summary. Thermally eftlcient production of natural gas can be accomplished by the use of hot brine to dissociate solid gas
hydrate deposits in the earth, The advantages of brine stimulation over steam or hot-water injection are lower energy requirements
for reservoir heating and hydrate dissociation, reduced heat losses, higher gas production, and improved thermal eftlciency. In
addition, the problems of blockage of rock pores and wellbore because of reformation of hydrates during gas producdon can be
avoided.
A mathematical model for a hot-brine stimulation technique was developed to compute gas recovery and the energy4ficiency
ratio (i.e., the ratio of energj content of produced gas to heat injected) for a reservoir coutaitdng gas hydrates. The effects of
variations in reservoir porosity, hydrate-zone thickness, depth, safinity of brine, brine temperature, and brine injection rate on the
energy-efticieniy ratio and” gas production were determined. A comparison of brine and steam injection cases for the smie heat
inje+ion rate shows bigber gas production and ener~eftlciency ratio for the brine case.

Introduction
Huge quantities of natural gas in the form of gas-hydrate deposits
exist in many regions of the world. These deposits occur in the
suboc.mnic sediments, as well as in the arctic regions. Gas hydrates
contain about 170 to 180 std ft3 natural gas/ft3 [170 to 180
std m3 /m3 ] hydrate and represent a potential unconventional
source of rtahtral gas. Gas hydrates are relatively immobile and im-
permeahlq hence they need to be dissociated into gas and watsr
to produce namral gas from hydrate reservoirs,
To decompose hydrates, heat must be added to a hydrate reser-
voir. A portion of this heat is required to raise the temperamre of
the reservoir to the dissociation temperature, and another portion
is required for convening hydrates into gas and water. The well-
bore beat losses and heat losses to overburdenlfmderburden for-
mations should be considered in the calculation of the actual heat
requirement. The heat required to dissociate hydrates is onIy a small
fraction (about one-tenth) of the heat obtained by burning the gas
produced from hydrates. fn other words, the production of natural
gas from hydrates is a thermodynamically energy-efficient process.
Several ways of dissociating mtuml gas hydrates have been sug-
ge~t~, 1A TIWSe include thermal recovery tedudques, such as
steam injection, hot-water injection, and tire flooding; depressmi-
zariom and injection of chemicals, such as methanol or glycol, which
cause hydrate destabihzaticm. In thermal recovery technique, the
heat required to dissociate hydrates is supplied from an external
source, whereas in other techniques, thii energy comes from the
surrounding formations.
Each of these merhcds has its own merits and demerits. For ex-
ample, in steam injection ind fweflcmding, heat 10sses w be se-
vere for thinner hydrate zone!, but for thicker ZOnes (greater than
150 ft [15 m]) these techniques can be thermally efficient. Fire-
flcoding can cause dilution of gas to be produced and can result
in a rrduction in its energy value, Hot-water injetiion will yield
lower heat losses than steam injection or tirefloodirg, but injec-
tivity of water in hydrate reservoirs will govern the applicability
of this method. The injection-water tempmwure should be low
enough to avoid. excessive heat losses, yet high enough to avoid
unrealistically high injection rates. Hydraulic fracturing can & used
to improve water injeilivitt” but can result in lower heat-transfer
efficiencies because of tieliig effects. Use of methanol or glyCOl
will be governed by economics, because large quantiti= of the8e
expensive chemicals will be needed to ensure sufficient gas pro-
duction.
.Copyright
19878ocle1yof PetmlmmEnglnem
fn the depressurization scheme, pressure reduction causes
destabiliition of hydrates. As hydrates dissociate, they absorb heat
from the surrounding formations. The hydrates continue to dissociate
until tiey generate tiougb gas to raise reservoir pressure to fhe
equilibrium pressme of hydrates at the new temperature, which is
lower than the original value. A temperature gradient is thus gener-
ated between hydrates (sink) and surrounding medm (source), and
heat flows to hydrates. The rate of dissmistion of hydrates., how-
ever, is controlled by the rate of heat flux frgm the surrounding
mrdia or by the thermaf conductivity of the surroundii rock matrix.
Holder and Angerr3 have shown that rhis technique yields excel-
lent results, if hydrates are in conjunction with the fro-gas zone.
Combining these recovmy schemes could afso be beneficti e.g.,
it maybe possible to produce gas from hydrama by thermal stimu-
lation followed by depressutirion.
Many questions need to be answered if gas is to be pmductd fmm
hydrates. First, tie form in which hydrates exist in a reservoir should
be known. Hydrates may exist in different forms (all hydrates, ex-
cess water, excess ice, in conjunction with free gas, or@ cOnjrmc-
tion with oil) and in different types (massive, nodular, laminated,
or dispersed). Each case wilI have a different effect on the method
of production and on economics. Second, the saturation of hydrates
in reservoir rock pores is unknown. Recently, well log inrer’preta-
tions have been used to determine porosity and hydrate saturation. 5
Third, there could be several problems associated with gas pro-
duction, such as pore blockage by hydrates or ice and blockage of
the wellbore resulting from re-fmmation of hydrates during flow
of gap through the prcduc.rion welI.
Despite these concerns, hydrates in the earth exhibit several char-
actsrisrics, especially when compa@ with other unconventional
natural gas resources, that increa3e their importance as a potential
energy resource and make their future production likely. These in-
clude higher concentration of gas in hydrated form, enormously
large deposits of hydrates, and their widespread existence in the
world. k addition, hydrates are likely to exist in conjunction with
conventional gas and oil. The production of gas from such hyir’ate
Wcurrences may be possible as a bonus during conventional pro:
duction of gas or oil. It is in this situation that the first venture of
gas production tloni hydrates is ex~e.+ed.
Brine Stimulation
Theuse of hot brine for dissociation of hydrates seems to be an
attractive recovery scheme for the following reasons. First, brine

Journal of Petroleum Technology, November 1987 1379

 o .5 10 15
SALINITY[W%]

IFig. i —Earth temperature profile and effect of salinity on ‘i9. Z—Effect of salinity on hydrate d[ssociat[on temperature
1methane hydrate equilibrium curves. md hydrate dissociation energy.

acts as a hydrate inhibiton i.e., at a give”n prissure, brine reduces
the equilibrium dissociation tempiralure”of hydrates, depending on
its salinity Thus, with the use of brine, the reservoir temperamre
need not be raised to an extent needed for other thermal recovery
techniques, such as steam or hot-water’ injection. Fig. 1 is a
depthltempera.ture diagram that indicates curves of earth tempera-
ture profile and methane hydrate equilibrium temperamre for differ-
ent salinities. In Fig. 1, the earth k131peraN1e profile is obtained
from geothermal gradiens for the Northwest Eileen Sfzte Well 2
on the North Slope of Alaska. The hydrate equilibrium curves are
obtained from p/Tdata for methane hydrates. It is clear from Fig.
1 that tie higher the salinity of brine, the lower the reservoir hezt-
ing requirement. Second, at lower dissociation tempereo.ms, the
beat of hydrate dissociation is lower. This fact, although not ap-
parent from the PIT diagram, can be proved by the use of a modi-
fied Clausius-Clatwmn eouation.
.- Fi.z. 2 shows the effect of salinitY
on hydrate disso~i~tion energy and hydrate dksociation temper~-
ture. Fig. 3 shows the increase in reservoir temperature needed for
hydrate dissociation at various depths. Finally, as a consequence.
of lower dissociation temperatures, heat losses are lower for brine
injection than for steam or hot-water injection. Thus, the triple ef-
fects of reduction in sensible beat requirement, reduction in hy-
drate dissociation energy requirement, and reduction in heat losses
resdt in better thermal etlciencies for brine infection.
In addition, it maybe possible to obtain hot brine from geotber-
md reservoirs in proximity to hydrate resemoirs, especially in a
suboceanic envimoment, Typically, the temperature of geothermal
brine ranges between 302 tid 698 ‘F [150 and 370”C] for depths

,ARCTIC !N9ULA?I

BASEROCK
o 24 5 s 19
ISHAL51
S4Ll N11r (W1)
t
‘i9. 3-Resemolr heating needed for hydrate diss.aciatto”
Fig. 4 Schematic of hydrate reservoir and well completk
t s;he:.

1380 Journal of Petroleum Technology, November .1987

 TABLE l—MODEL RESERVOIR PARAMETERS TABLE 2-WELL CONFIGURATION DATA ‘“

T~,, ‘F [Kl 12.4 [265.25] Cti, n [ml 0.119s [0.037]

g ~ above permafrost base, °F/ft rt. t ff [ml 0.145s [0.044]
[K/m] 0.0104 [0.019] rd, ft [ml 0.2615 [0.08]
go ::; permafrost base, ‘Flft r.., ff [m] 0.2917 [0.089]
. . . .. 0,0175 [0.032] Thickness of insulation,
Permafrost base depth, ft [m] i ,745 [532] ra - r,., ft Id 0.1157 [0.035]
Areal extent of reservoir, ft x ft rw, fl [m] 0.5 [0.15]
660 x 660 [201x 201] Thiokness of cement,
167 [2675] rw-~m)fi[ml 0.2083 [0.063]
0.2 [0.s37] rflj ft [ml 2.0 [0.61]
59,5 [953] k,u,,flg, Btu/(hr-fi-°F) [W/m, K] 25 [43.3]
0.96314.031 ,=,. , Btu/(hr-ft.°F) pivlm. K] 25 [43,3]
57.1 [914.7j {h,, &tu/(hr-ft-°F) pN/m. K ] 0.02 [0.0246]
0.54 [2.26] k ~men,,Btu/(hr-ft-°F) pV/m. K] 0,4 [0.692]
5.0 [80] k,.,,, Btu/(hr-ft-°F)~/m. Kl 1.36 [2,S54]
0.5 [2.09]
0,343 [0.594]
0,0176 [0.031]
0,2274 [0.394] TABLE 3-KEY PROCESS PARAMETERS
3.22 [5.5731
1,3612.3541’ Range Default
O.oi [1.03j 0,15 to 0.4
6 0,3
181.3 D, ft [m] 2,000103,500 [610 to 1067] 2,500 [762]
h, ft Im] 25 to ;: &f36t0 30] 100 [30]
x, weight fraction 0.05
:tweett 3,280 and 4,921 ft [IWO and 1500 m], and their salinities 70, ‘F [oC] 250 to 400 [121 to 204] 350 [lnq
vary betwe?.n O.S and 2 wt%.6 /8, B/D [ma/d] 200 to 1,000 [32 to 159] 500 [79]
Fig. 4 shows a mcdel reservoir and well completion scheme con-
sidered in this stodv. Table 1 gives the model reservoir Parame-
ters; Table 2 gives ‘tie well co~guration data; and Tabl~3 gives
This is a heat-transfer model because it is assumed that gas pro-
the range of key process parameters.
ducdon is controlled by the rate of heat dissipation to the hydrate
Fig. 5 is a schematic of the brine stimulation technique. This
zone and is not governed by the flow of gas and water, This model
method consists of cyclic irjection of hot brine at a predetermined
considers three stages of each cycle as in the steam stimulation prcc-
tempemture, injection rate, and salini~ into a reservoir tintaiting
ess.4 Calculations involved in each of these stages are given below.
hydrates. Each cycle is considered to mnsist of three stages: the
brine injection, hydrate dissociation, and gas production stages.
Brine Injection Stage. At the beginning of each cycle the availa-
Mathematicel Model ble reservoir PV is computed. Because a unit volume of hydrates
Tbe primary objective of thk study was to develop a mathe.ma.ticfl produces about 0.8 unit volume of water after dissociation, tie in-
model to determine the gas production and energy-efficiency ra- jected brine vohtttte is considered 6s 20% Ofthe available FOE space.
ties for the brine stimulation iecbm’que and to compare the results For fixed brine injection. rate, i~, the injeztion time is computed.
with a steam injt?otion procms under similar reservoir conditions. The heat injection rate, QB, is obtained from brine properties and
The hydrate zone was considered to consist of saturated methane brine iojection temperature, TO, by
hydrates. The foll~wing assumptions were made in model devel-
opment. QB=5.615iBOBCB(To –Tr)/24, ., . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . ...(1)
1. All reservoir rock and fluid properties remain consfattt dur-
ing injection/dissociation/production cycles.
2. Injection of brine and dissociation of hydrates does not affect where
in-situ stress field conditions. In other words, no soil compaction PB = brine density,

occurs after gas ii produced tlom the dissociation zone. CB = specitic ~eat of brine,
3. The hvdrate zone has sufficient itiectitiiy
. . to susiain medeter- TP = reference temperature (60”F [ 16&CI), and
mined’ inje&ion rates. QB = heat ittjectifm rate.

BRINE INJEcTION PHASE HYDRATE DISSOCIATION PHASE GAS PRODUCTION PHASE

Fig. 5—Schematic of brine stimulation technique.

,.
Journal of Petroleum Technology, November 1937 1331
—
 All the parameters needed for Eq. 5 are given in Table 2. The
time function, f(t), is given by Eq. 6 for ti”j 27 days:

‘B--h - f“=”(%)
–0.29. . . . . . . . ..(0

For ti.j <7 days, f(t) is obtained from tabular data. 8

After the downhole brine temperature, T,, is computed, the
drilled-hole temperm.we, ~W, casing temperamre, T,O, and tubing
temperature, T,., are obtained by

T = ~riUtif(t) +&oi[&@ + Tm)

w ~,,utif(t)+k,oa , ....................

r=O rw
rti.Uti(T1-Tw), . . . . . . . . . :. (g)
rfi rf, rf~ TC=T4-I
DISTANCE FROMTHE CEN?5ROFTHE WELL —
and
79. 6+hematic of dissociated zone and hydrate mm tern.
)erature profiles during dissociation stage.
ln(r,ilr,o)
T,. = T,; + — rtiUti(T1-Tw). (9)
[1 kim
The heat injected during each cycle, Qi, is then obtained by
The wellbore heat losses, Q.,b, are then obtained as
Qi=24QBttnj, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . ...(2)

where ti~ is injection time. 2uk,03 (T,, : TR)D

Qwb= . . . . . .(10)
The in@on-stage thermal efficiency is computed by consider- f(l)
ing the wellbore heat losses and the heat losses to the overbur-
denlunderburden formations. The fractional weUbore heat loss, fwb, is given by
Wellfmm Heat Losses. Wellbore beat losses during the brine in-
jection stage are computed by Ramey’s7 and Willhite’s8 ap-
fwb=&=l_E
proaches. As brine moves through the wellbore, them is heat transfer . ......... (11)
between brine and the earth because of the temperab.ue gradient. QB ‘b
If the temperature of brine is high, then these heat losses can be
significant. To compute wellbore heat losses, Ramey7 and Heat Losses to OverburdenlUnderburden. To obtain heat loss-
willhite8 considered steady-state heat transfer in the wellbore and es to overburdenhmderburden formations during the irjection phase,
unsteady radial heat conduction to the e?mh. ~ese methods have Marx and Langenheint’s, 10 Mandl and Volek’s, 11 and Myhill and
been reviewed by Prats, 9 The fo130wing equations are involved in .%egemeier’s 12 approaches can be used.
these calculations, Tbe dimensionless time, tinjD, is obtained by Eq. 12:
Initially, the downhole brine tetnpefamre, T1, is computed by
h’f~~ 2 CQg
Ti =g&+Tm,

where
–g&+(To+g~-Tm)e -DIA, (3) tiIjD=4
() —
MD
‘tin,

h2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,.. .(12)

where MOB and MD are volumetric specific heat of overbur-

gG = geothennd gradient,
denlunderburden and dissociated zone, respectively, and aoB is
Tm = mean surface temperature,
thermal diffusivity of overburdenlunderburden.
D = depth, and Reservoir heat efficiency, ER, is then computed from RI. 13:
A = a constant given by

5.615iBPBCBIk,0i1+r,iU,if(t)] ER=L [r2 ‘–l+e%m erfc(~) .(13)

A= , , . . . . . . . .. ...-.....”...(4) t;nj~ r 1
481rr,iU,ikwir
The fractional heat loss to overburdenlunderburden, fR, is given by
where
iB = brine injection rate, .fR=(l-Ed(l-fmb). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .. . . . . . ..(14)
k,oil = thermal conductivity of soil,
Uti = overall heat-transfer coeftiiient for a given well The overall thermal efficiency of the injection period js then ob-
completion scheme, and tained by
f(t) = the time function,
E:nj=(EM@.rJ. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(I5I

The overall heat transfer coefficient k obtained by Eq. 5:

The average tempcrmm %f brine in the dissOci~ted zOne at fie
end of the injection period, TD, is then computed by co~idering
r,~fiti=
the beat remaining in the reservoir after heat losses and is given by

In(r,olr,{) + ln(rdlr,o) ln(rcJrci) + ln(rw/rm) -1 d~!inj%j

TD= +TD{, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(16)
—+— —
[ kubing klm &lllg k cmx”t 1 MDv~{
where VD;is tie initial volume of the dissociated zone and TDi is
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(5) the temperamre of the dissociated zone before injection.

13s2 Joumat of Petroleum Technology, November 1987

Hydrate Dfsmciation St8ge. At the end of the brine injection stage, The e.ffec&k thermal conductivity of the hydrate zone is obtained
temperamre distribution is approximated by a step tinction as shown by
in Fig. 6. The dissociation of bydratm is an unsteady-state, moving-
bounda~ problem with heat transfer in r and z directions. +Wa;-o+l , ,,,,,,,,:,
To compute the hydrate dissociation front, temperature profiles kfl=kR . . . . . . . . ..(26)
in the dissociated and hydrate zones, and heat losses to overburden j (c$~-l)(q+~-d)+l 1
and underburden as a function of time, it Ysnecessti to obtain so-
lutions of two partial differential equations with initial and bound- where 8H is the ratio of the thermal conductivity of pure hydrates”
aJY condltioits as given below. to the thermal conductivity of rock matrix.
Heat transfer caused by conduction in the radial direction in a The dissociation temperature of methane hydrates, Tf, obtzinti
dissociated zone is described by by correlating VL1fidata formetlmne hydrates,14 is given by

la 8TD(r,t) 1 aTrJr,z) 15360.8

-— r— , . . . . . . . .. . . ... . . ..(17) Tf< -459.7 –j7x), . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . (27)
r ar [ ar 1- aD at [ 37.05 –ln(f@ 1

where TD(r,t) is the temperamre in the dissociated zone at any r where pR is reservoir pressure and.t(x) is the reduction in dissoci-
and t. The initial condition for Eq. 17 is ation temperature asa result of salkdty, which is obtained from
Fig. 2.
T~(r,t)=T~ fOrrWSrS~at t=t;nj . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . ..(1S)
Hydrate dissociation energy, AffD, obtained from amoditied
Ckiusius-clapeyron equation, is given by
and tbc boundary condition is

TD(r,t)=Tf for r=rf at t>t~.j, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .... ..(19) dbp

AHD=4SH 2R(Tf+459.7)2 —-nAvw?(Tf+459.7):T
[ dT 1
where T, is the dksociation temperature of hydrates and r’ is the
radius of the hydrate dissociation front.
. . . . (28)
The heat-transfer equation in the hydrate zone is given by
where
,1 a aT~(r,t) I arH(7,f ) 4= poiosiw,
.— r— .—— . ..... (20) SM = hydt’zte zzturation,
r ar [1 ar w at
z = compressibility factor evaluated atpR and Tf,
where T~(r,t)is the temperature in the hydrate zone at any r and n = hydrate number (5.75 for methane), and
r, and au is the thermal diffusivity of the hydrate zone. The ini- AVE, = change btvolume because ofdissociationof
tial condition for Eq. 20 is given by hydrates.

TH(r,$)=TR for r>rfi at t=tinj, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(21) PIT data in Fig.. 1 were used to compute MD.The heat 10S5eStO
overburdetiunderburden formations during the dissociation “peri-
where TR is reservoir temperature. Two boundary conditions for od were computed with Eq. 29:
t> ttnj are given by
dQo8 2rkoB(r~–rwz)(~ –TR)
TH(r,t)=Tf forr=rf . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ..(22) —= ,, .,.,.. . . . . . . (29)
dt G
and
where QoB istheheat transfer tooverburden fmmationsand G
TH(r,t)=TRforr+co: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..7 . . . ..(23) is theaverage temperamre in thedisscciated zone.
The thermal efficiency during the dissociation stage is given by
Tbemoving boundmy condition for Eqs. 17and20is given by
QOB
ED=l- . . . . .. . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (30)
8TD(r,t) c?T~(r,?) MDVD1(~-TR)
kD—-kH- .AHD:
ar ar The overall heat-balance equation at the end of the &scciation”phase
is given by
fort> rinjmdr=~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(24)
MDVDi(~ –TR)ED =MDV@ (T#TR)+AHD(~Df– VDi),
where kD and k~ are the thermal conductivities of dissociated and
hydrate zones, respectively, and AHD is the heat of hydrate dis- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(31)
sociation.
where VDiand Vmarcthe initial zndtinzl volumes oftledissociat-
Because the dissociated zone contains gas and water within the
pores of the rock matrix, the effectitie thermal conductivity of the ed zone, respectively.
dissociated zone is calculated from the knowledge of porosity, satu- Calculation Procedure. The following procedure was adopted to
ration of gas aid water, and individual thermal conductivities of compute dissociation stage time, hydrate front radius at the end of
gas, water, and rock matrix. The effective thermal conductivity of dissociation, thermal efficiency of disswiation stage, and temper-~
thedissociated zone isobtained by RuszeYsmethod13 as follows: ature protlles in dissociated and hydrate zones.
l. Aninitial estimate ofrfiscalculated byassuming E~=l in
theoverall heat-bdancee quation, Eq. 31.
sww%w-l)+l] 2. Dissociation time is computed by solving Eqs. 17 through 24
kD =kR + “[$%( P’-l)”+’] ,
[ (aw–l)(d%–~)+] ($8-1)(+*-.$)+1 1 numerically. Numerical solutions of these equations were first ob-
tai”~bySe@15 form icemoving-bmtndary problem. He ilI-
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .. . .. . . . . . . . ..(25) troduced dimensionless parameters and correlations in obtaining
numerical solutim.s. Forhydrate dissociation, these pammetersare
wheresw andsg are the saturations of ivater and gas, reSp&XiVe-
kH(TR– T, )
ly, and 6W and ag are the ratios of thermal conductivity of water ,$/= —, . . . . . . ... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(32)
and gas, respectively, tothermal conductivity of the rock matrix. kD(~ - Tf)

JOUI.IMI of petroleum Technology, November 1987. 1383

 14 .

12 -

70-

o I
o 200 .400 s~~ ~~~ ,000

TIME (DAYS)

Fig. 7—Effect of salinity on energy-efficiency ratio.

65
t

and 0 200 400 600 800 l@oo

TIME (DAYS)
kDtD;u
*D= —, ,,..,,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(36)
MDr.2 Fig. 8-Effect of salinity on overall thermal efficiency.

In Eq. 33,. s is a pmineter obtained from tabular data.’5 The

solutions obtained by Sengul are applicable to hydrate dissociation
because the parameterss and # for methane hydrates fall within
the range of parameters for which Eqs. 32 through 36 are valid.
Dissociation time for an initial estimate of rf in Step 1 is comput-
ed from Eqs, 32 through 36.
3. Thermal efficiency, ED, is obtained from Eq. 30.
4, The overall heat-balance equation, Eq. 31, is checked.
5. If the overall heat-balance equation is satisfied, the solution
is obtain& if not, a new value of r is computed from Eq. 31 with
a new value for ED, and Steps 2 t1 rough 4 are repeated until the
solution is obtained.
Gas Production Stage. In “ihe gas production stage, the amount
of gas produced by dissociation of gas hydrates is determined by
material balance. For a predetermined gas production rate, the pro-
duction time is coniputed by considering that all dissociated gas
is produced. It is assumed that heat losses during the gas produ-
ctionstage are negligible compared with other beat losses. ~e overall
energy-efficiency ratio is computed from cumulative heat injected
and cumulative gas prcduced. Tbe following equation is used to
calculate the energy-efficiency ratio:
Remdtsand Discussion
To determine the best possible conditions for gas production from
hydrates by injetiion of hot brine, the model was tested for a wide
range ofparameters. Energy-e fticiency ratio, gaspmducticm rate,
wellbore heat 10S?.W,heat losses to overburdenhuukrburden, overall
thermal efficiency, and rate of hydrate front pmpagad.on were cmn-
puted for 3 years of production. Sensitivity analysis included vari-
ationsin resemoirpomsity, hydrate-zone fhickne.ss, depth, brine
injection rate, salinity, and brine temperature. Otdy one parameter
was varied at a tbnq other parameters were kept at default values
(base case). Model predictions and the effect of each of the mcdel
parameters are summarized below.
Salinity of Brine. Fig. 7 shows energy-efficiency ratio vs. time
for various salinities between Oand 15 wt%. The O’%-ssdinilycufve
represents results forhot-water injection. Fig. 7sbowstbat brine
salini~ strongly influences the energy-efficiency ratio; Results in-
d,i~ti that the energy-efficie”iy ratios for brine injection are higher
than for hot-water injection. An increa$e h sdbdty improves energy
.efticiency furtber because ofreduced heat losses, rexiucedrcser-
voir heating, and reduced hydrate dissociation energy. The energy-

~=
.~
[$ ‘9.’:)1:.
. ... ..... ... . .. .. . (37)
efticiencj ratio increases by approximately 2%/wt% increase in
salinity. Fig. 8showstbat tbeoverall tiennat effkiency increases
with an increase in salinity. Fig. 9 shows weUbore heat losses,
injection-phase beat losses, dissociation-phase heat losses, and over-
~~ (&inj%j~D) all thermal efficiency as a tiction of time, As expected, weUbore
beat losses for brine injection =e far less than for steam irjection.4
where
For atl model catcutations, it was considered that the annutw space
qg = gas prOductiOn rate, between tubing and casing was completely packed with highly in-
tpr = production time,
sulating materiat. For most of the case studies, wellbore heat loss-
X = heating value of gas, and esranged between 5 and 12% oftbe heat injected. Fig. 10 shows
N = number of cycles. that cumulative gas production increased with brine salinity for the
‘Tlte denomimtor represents cumulative heat injected. same brine inj@@ rate. For a salinity range of.0 to 15%, m-

1384 JoumaJof Petroleum Technology, NOvmnber 1987

 CUMULATIVE GAS PRODUCED (MM.SCF) HEAT LOSSES (%)
~.m z ; y ~
. s

OVERALL CYCLE THERMAL

EFFICIENCY
—

CUMULATIVE GAS PRODUCED (MMSCF) ENERGY EFFICIENCY RATIO

AT THE END OF ONE YEAR

i -
 12.0.

h=100 FT

!0.5 .
100 -

9.5
80 .
SE
$$
a>
~ # ,.~
60 20
K!&
h, 25 FT. go

kg
40. 6 -
::
ox
~:
~<

3 t t
L). 15 ~.z .. 0,25.. .0.3 0.35 0.4 0.25 0..3 0.35 0.4.
D.15 0,2
POROSITY POROSITY

?ig. 13—Cumulative gas production at 1 year vs. porosity at Fig. 14—Energy efficiency ratio at 1 year vs. porosity at differ-
$fferent hydrate thicknesses. ent hydrate thicknesses.

mulative gas production t’an~ed between 803 and 1,100 scflbbl [144
and 198 std m3 /m31 of brine iniected. In general, the salhity of
brine should be as &gh m pos;ble for M-proved results.
Brine Itljection Rate. Brine injection rate, “iB, was varied from
2GQto 1,OW B/D [32 to 159 m3/d]. These results indicate that the
energy-efficiency ratio and gas production increase with injection
rate (see Figs. 11 and 12).
Brine Injection Temperature. Three factors need to be consid-
ered for the decision of optimum brine temperatures.
1. Very high brine temperatures result in severe heat losses and
a reduclion in the energy-efticienoy ratio.
2. Very low brine injection temperamres result in higher i@c-
tion rates to achieve significant gas production.
3, The tentpemtore in geothonnai reservoirs puts an upper limit
on brine temperature, if hot btitie from geothermal reservoirs is
to be used.
In this study, brine temperatures between 250 and 4CWF [121
and 204”C] were considered. F!gs. 11 and 12 show that an increase
in brine temperamre decreases the energy-efficiency ratio and in-
creases gas production for the same injectioit rates. fn genetal, to
obtain acceptable gas prcducdon rate$ at high energy-efficiency ra-
tios, the brine temperamre should be between 250 and 400”F [121
and 204 TCI, and injection rates should be higher than 5,000 BID
(795 m3/d].
Reservoir Porosity. The pomsiiy was varied between 0.15 and 0.4.
Cumulative gas production and energy-efficiency ratio intie with
an increase in porosity, as shown in Figs. 13 .ind 14. WeUbore heat
iosses are independent of pomsiV, and hydrate dissociation ener-
gy is ditectty propxtionaf to pmsity. Generally, a minimum pmsi-
ty of 15% is essential for successful production performance.
Hydrate-Zone Thickness. Figs. ,13 and 14 show the energy-
efficiency ratio and cumulative gas produaion for 25-, 50:, 75-
and lCO-ft P.6-, 15-, 23-, arid 30-m] hydrate zones. Thinner zones
iose more heat to overburden than thicker zones; thus, the energy-
efficiency ratio increases with the increase in hydrate-zone thick-
ness. At least 25 ft [7.6 m] of hydrate zone should be present to
merit gas production.
DentIt. Hvdrate stabiliw amlvsis for the Alaskan No3th Sloce shows
th; hydr~tes may exi~t in a’ depth range of 90Q to 3,6@ ft t275
to 1lMl ,m]. Permafrost depth, on the other hand, ranges from 600
to 2,000 ft [183 to 610 m]. The hydrate zones above the permafrost
base may cause pore blockage during gas production thus, in this
study, a depth range of 2,000 to 3,500 ft [610 to 1067 m] was con-
sidered. Figs, 15 md 16 show the effect of depth on the energy-
ez%ciency ratio. and cumulative gas production. Because the earth
temperance increases with depth, lower xmervoiz heating is reqic?d
for deeper mne$ thus, the energy-efficiency ratio increases with
depth. Gas production, however, is not significantly affected by
depth.
Fig. 17 shows the radius of a hydrate dissociation front as a fonc-
tion of time for various hydrate-zone thicknesses. This behavior
was found in all cases. As-the hydrate front moves away from the
weilbore, larger times are necessmy for brine injection and heat
propagation.
ISrlne Injection vs. Steam Inpctlon
Onecase
study was porfcmned to compare steam injection and En’ine
injection. fn this case, stwm temperature was considered as 624°F
[329”C] at samrated conditions and brine temperature at 3CO”F
[149°C . The heat input rate for both cases was kept constant at
10x 10 J Btu/hz [2.9x 106 WI. It is clear from Fig. 18 that brine
irjection yields much more favorable gas production and energy-
efflciency ratios than steam injection for the same heat input rate.
Eff@ of Convection in Dissociated Zene
The model presented in this study does not include convection ef-
fects in the dissociated zone caused by movement of gas and water
produced by hydrate disswiation. Inclusion of the convection heat
~~~=~~7$?tiyhcr~~
sm d the effect of~e~~~m!itic0mp,etiW.
convectum m the melt region Sp.dur-
ing phase-change processes, such as melting. They presented an
implicit finite-difference scheme to obtain solutionz for convection
during melting. Their analysis showed that for conduction ordy,
the heat transfer rate decmses monotonically with time. .For si-
multaneous conduction and convection, the heat transfer rate de-
creased at early times and attained a minimum, then increased and
atileved a maximum and subsequently decreased. The oqdmtation
for this behavior is as foliows. At early times, the convection is
weak and conduction is a dominant heat-tramport mechanism, con-

1386
 15F

12 -

h=100FT.
EK

~;
*LU
Oz
Zo

00
~g
~ul
$:
u+
~1-
$<
6-

3
3000 35, 0 1 I , ,
2000 25.00
0 200 400 YW ac< l:CO It

DEPTH FT TIME (DAYS)

Fig. 15–Energy-efficiency ratio at 1 year vs. resetvoir depth Fig. 17—Hydrate dissociation front radius vs. time for diffc
for different hydrate thicknesses. ent hydrate thicknesses.

120,

100- h.100 H.
b -
gg
,- 75 FT.
g ~’ ~. /

~E h. 50 FT.
r@
~y 6Q-
00 h. 25 FT.

$k
—
~; 40

Z*

=+
U$ 20 -

0 ,
?000 2500 3500

DEPWI-FT “3000 TIME lYEARS\

’19. 16—Cumulative gas production at 1 year vs. reservoir Fig. 18-Brine injection vs. steam injectfon for identical reser-
~epth for different hydrate thicknesses. voir conditions and identical heat iniection rate.

sequently, the heat transfer decreases with time. As the melt layer
thickens, convection grows stronger, thereby arresting fbe decrease
in heat transfer, This causes the heat transfer rate to increase as
the melt layer fiickens. As the melt layer thickens sufflcienfly, how-
ever, a bou”&ry-ktyer .rnechtism Kcurs. The heat is no longer
transported direct3y across tbe melt region by conduction but is car-
ried by only the recirculating flow. Thus, the heat transfer rate starts
decreasing.
For ~ydrate dissociation, which is a more complicated process
than melting of a solid to liquid, tle conv.d.on within the dissociated
zone wi31improve heat transfer to the hydrate front. The hydrate
dissociation rate and gas production rate will thus be bigher than
the results presented in this study.
The theoretical amlysis presented here indicates that there is good
potential in the brine injection technique for tbermdly efftcient pro-
duction of gas frbm hydrate rese@rs, if hydrates exist in a pure
state and if the economics is favorable for natural gas production
from hydrates. Reduced heat losses, reduced reservoir heating, and
lower hydrate dissociation energy are some of the advantages of
brine injection over steam injection. For acceptable gas produc-
tion rates, the hydrate reservoir should possess (1) at least 15%
porosity, (2) hydrate-zone tbkkness of at least 25 ft [7.6 m], (3)
brine salinity as high as possible, (4) brine tempemture between
250 and 4CWF [121 and 204”C], and (5) brine i~ection rate of
at least S,@Xl B/D [795 m3/d].
1367
Nomenclature co = outside of casing
A = constant in Eq. 4, II [m] D = disswiated zon~
f = hydrate front or find
C = specific heat, Btu/Ibm-”F [kJ/kg. K]
$ = initial hydrate front
D = reservoir depth, ft [m]
ED = thermal efficiency of dissociation stage g = gas
Etnj = fhermal WOciency’ of injecf ion magi H = hydrate
i = ifi~
ER = reservoir heat’ efficiency
EWb = wellbore heat efficiency inj = injection
ins = insulation
fR = fIaCtiOnd heat 10SSes from the resewoir to
surrounding fotmation , mz = mean surface
fd = fractional heat losses in the wellbore OB =
overburdenltmderburd.en
f(t) = time function in Eq. 6 pr =
produced
f(x) = reduction in dissociation temperature because of R =
rock or reservoir
salini~, ‘F [K] ref =
reference conditiom
gc = geofbemw.1 gradient, “,F/ft [K/m] ii = tubing inside
h = hydrate zone tilckness, ft [m] {o. = tubing outside
AfiD = hydrate dissociation energy, Btulres ft3 [Jlres m3] w = well
i~ = brine injection rate, B/D [m3 /d] W = water
k = thermal conductivity, Btulhr-ft-”F RVlm. Kl O = surface conditiom
L, = liquid water phase 1 = dowfiole conditions
~ = ~onstit in Eq, 34
Acknowledgments
MD = volumetric specitic heat of dissociated zone,
(1 –.$)pfic~ +4@wcvsw+pBcBsB +PGcGsG), We thank the Petroleum Development LaboratoT and the Petrole-
um Engineering Dept., U. of AJaska, Fairbanks, for timnciaf sup-
Btu/ft3-OF [J/m3 K]
port during the course of this investigation.
k40B = volumetric specific heat of
overburdenlunderburden, Btu/ft3 -“F [J/m3. K] References
n = hydrate ““mber, gmol wc@r/gmol gas in hydrate L McGuire, P. L.: ,JMetbme Gas Production by Thermal Stimulation, ”
phase paper presented at he 1981 Fourth Canadian Permafrost Conference,
N = cycle number Catgary, Alta. (March 2-6).”
~R = reservoir pie.ssure, psia [kPa] 2. Holder, G,D, et .1.: “A Thenntiymmic Evacuationof Tbmd “Re@6v-
ery of Gas Fmm Hydrates in the Earth, ” JPT (May 1982) 1127-32.
~ g = gas production rate, Mscf/D [m3 Id] 3. Holder, G.D. and Angeri, P. F.: “Simulation of Gas Production from
QB = kit injection rate, Btu/hr pv] a Re$swoir ContainingBoti Gas HydratesandFree iYaturaJGas,” paper
Qi =“ heat injected, Btu [J] SPE 11105 presented at the 1982.SPE AnnuaJ TecbnicaJ Conference
imd ExMbition, New Or!eans, Sept. 26-29.
QOB = heat lost to overburden, B~ [J]
4. Bayler, G,A, e?al.: “A Steam Cycling Model for Gas Production from
QWb = wellbore heat loss rate, Btu/hr [Wl
a Hydrate Reservoir,,, paper presented al the 1984 Natl. Meeting of
c = radiaf distance from center of well, ft [m] American Inst. of ChcmicaJ Engineers, Atlam, GA, Mwh 11-14.
R = universal gas constant 5. CofJett, T. S:, Godbele, S. P., and Economies, C.A.: “Quantification
R, = energy -dtkiency ratio of lmSim Gas Hydrates with Well ,Logs,,, paper S435-78 presented
s = constant in Eq. 35 at the t984 .Annud Clfvt Meeting, Ca@y, Alta,, June 10-12.
6. Thomas, D, M.: ‘A Smunary of the chemical Characterisdcs of the
S = fluid saturation HGP-A Welk Puns, Hawaii, ” Pmt., Eighth Workshop on Geother-
tD = dimensionless time ii Eq. 36 mal Resermir Engineering, Stanford, CA (1982).
tDi~s = dissociation stage time, days 7. Ramey, H.]. Jr.: “W&lltWreHeat Transmission,” nT (APfi 1962)
riaj = injection stage the, days 427-35; Tnm.s,, MME (1962) 225.
8. Willhite, G.P.: “@mrafl Heat Transfer Cosffmienti in Steam and Hot
tinjD, = dlmensiorifess time in Eq. 12
Water Injection Wetts, ” JPT (May 1967)607-15.
tp = production stage time, days 9. Pracs. M,: J%emud Recover?, Monozraph Saies, SPE, Richadson,
~ = temperamre, “F ~] TX (1982) 7, 43.
T = average temperature, “F [K] 10. Max. J,W, ad Laneenheim. R.H.: “Reservoir Headnn bY Hot Fluid
fl,~ = overall heat-transfer coefficient, Btulhr-ftz -“F hjecticm,,, Trims., “~E (i959) 216, 312-15. ‘.
11. Mad, G. and Volek, C.W.: “Heat and Mass TraNFort in Stemn-Drive
N/mz. K] ProceSSa, ,. ..—. (M.rch
.sP,?f .. .. . ... .1969J
. .. . 59-79 Trans.. ASME ( 1969i 246.
~Di, ~DF = initial and find dwsociafed volume, ft3 [m3 ] 12, Myhill, N...A. and Stegemeier, G.L.: ‘WeamDrive Coi&lafiOn and
. . . . .- . . . . . . . . .-
AVW = volume chance durine-. hvdrate dissociation pdiCtiOU,’ +“1 (~.D, lY/8J 115-?,...
~ = brine sali”i~, weightfmcrirm 13. Perry, R.H. and Chilton, C. H,: ChemicalEngineerk Handbook,tifth
X =
heating vaf.e, Btu/Mscf [kJ/m3] edit(on, M&raw Hill Book Co. Jnc., New York City (19773)
14. Deaton, W.M. and Frost, E. M.: G@ Hydrae. and TfI.ir J+l.tiofin 10
z =
gas compressibility the Otxradm of NaruralGasPiDelines,USBM, Monomauh 8 (1946).
a =
thermal diffusivity, “tiz/hr [mm2 /s] 15. Sentil, M.: ‘:Numerical SoI~ion of Heat Cmducti_&”witb Phase
6H =
hydrate gas content, scflft3 hydrate [m3 gas/m3 Chmge in Cylindrical Systems,” PbD dissertaticm, Stanford U., Stan-
hydrate] ford, CA (1977).
16. Sparrow, E. M., Patmh, S. V,, and Ramadhyani, S.: “Analysis of
8, = ratio of thermal conductivity of gas to that of rock Melting i“ the Prcsencc of Natural Convection in the Melt Region,”
matrix Trans., ASME (1977) 99, 520.
5%,= ratio of thermal conductivity of water to that of
rock matrix” S1 Metric Conversion Frrctors
density, lbm/ft3 [kg/m3 ]
P = bbl X 1.589873. E–01 = m3
a = constant in Eq. 33 “fi” X 3.048 E-01 .= m
+ = porosity ft3 X 2.g31 685 E–02 = m3
‘F ~F-3Z)/l.8 = .~
#’ = constant in Eq. 32’
Subscripts WCmvalsio. fad., k . . . . .. JPT
Otigind SPE n!m.scri.ot received for review March 27,7 9&3. PWW .cmP!ti W p.blica-
B = brine UO. Jan, 15, 1986. Revised nmnuwipt r%eived De.. 13, ?986, Paper (SPE 135%) WI
ci = inside of casing Presentedatthe 1985. SPE Cahfornla Regional Meeting hdd i. Bdwsfield, March 27-29.

1388 Journal of PetroleumTechnology,November1987